Page 19 of 19 FirstFirst ... 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Results 361 to 380 of 380

Thread: Rad compares units - a thread for balancing.

  1. #361

    Default Re: Rad compares units - a thread for balancing.

    The problem is that frontal charges are useless, even when performed by celtic elites. I doubled the charge value of Arkoi and I barely noticed any difference, things improved only when I doubled melee hit rate in battle_config.

    Not related to the infantry charge issue, but the same thing happen with regular javelins (those carried by most celtic melee units and thureophoroi for example) against line infantry, they become relevant only after raising the accuracy of ranged weapons in battle_config. Otherwise the enemy infantry can just tank them as they do very little, if any, damage, which seems odd to me.

    Jurand' suggestion about raising charging time could be good too, but I don't know if it's possible.
    Last edited by Aper; February 26, 2019 at 08:58 AM.

  2. #362
    QuintusSertorius's Avatar EBII Hod Carrier
    Artifex

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    11,011

    Default Re: Rad compares units - a thread for balancing.

    Javelins thrown from where?

  3. #363

    Default Re: Rad compares units - a thread for balancing.

    Frontally, before a charge. I just ran some test battles, 3 batoroi against 3 cisalpine swordsmen (same stats), 1 unit of archers as general. The mighty volley of javelins thrown before the impact consistently killed less than 10 men on each side, isn't this odd? And those were naked barbarians, if you try them on hoplites they are even worse obviously. The purpose of those javelins shouldn't be to soften the enemy line before the clash? Right now they soften only weak units who are not a threat anyway.

  4. #364
    QuintusSertorius's Avatar EBII Hod Carrier
    Artifex

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    11,011

    Default Re: Rad compares units - a thread for balancing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aper View Post
    Frontally, before a charge. I just ran some test battles, 3 batoroi against 3 cisalpine swordsmen (same stats), 1 unit of archers as general. The mighty volley of javelins thrown before the impact consistently killed less than 10 men on each side, isn't this odd? And those were naked barbarians, if you try them on hoplites they are even worse obviously. The purpose of those javelins shouldn't be to soften the enemy line before the clash? Right now they soften only weak units who are not a threat anyway.
    There's your problem, the shield values mean javelins are much more effective from behind, than frontally. Get them behind the fighting line, throw volley, then charge.

  5. #365
    Jurand of Cracow's Avatar History and gameplay!
    Artifex

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Cracovia
    Posts
    2,054

    Default Re: Rad compares units - a thread for balancing.

    Well, me, I follow a following home-rule:

    14) Neither send the foot javelinmen or archers behind the enemy lines to shoot in the enemy backs, nor shoot the javelins or arrows in the back of your fighting troops engaged with an enemy.
    The javelins were historically used to soften the enemy lines before the battle. The troops with javelins had almost always very low discipline and moral - it's very un-historical to expect them to dare to go behind enemy lines and fight - they'd flee beforehand. In a similar way: it's unlikely that the javelinmen would hurl the javelins in the backs of their own companions.

    BTW, do the javelins have the ap (armor-piercing) attribute?

  6. #366
    QuintusSertorius's Avatar EBII Hod Carrier
    Artifex

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    11,011

    Default Re: Rad compares units - a thread for balancing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jurand of Cracow View Post
    Well, me, I follow a following home-rule:

    14) Neither send the foot javelinmen or archers behind the enemy lines to shoot in the enemy backs, nor shoot the javelins or arrows in the back of your fighting troops engaged with an enemy.
    The javelins were historically used to soften the enemy lines before the battle. The troops with javelins had almost always very low discipline and moral - it's very un-historical to expect them to dare to go behind enemy lines and fight - they'd flee beforehand. In a similar way: it's unlikely that the javelinmen would hurl the javelins in the backs of their own companions.

    BTW, do the javelins have the ap (armor-piercing) attribute?
    Which javelins? Pila might have been used that way, but skirmishers weren't. There's a big difference between javelin-armed line infantry and javelin skirmishers.

    No, javelins don't have ap any more.

  7. #367

    Default Re: Rad compares units - a thread for balancing.

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    There's your problem, the shield values mean javelins are much more effective from behind, than frontally. Get them behind the fighting line, throw volley, then charge.
    Like Jurand, I'm not convinced that flanking and shooting javelins in the back was common in ancient times. Honestly, I remember evidence of this behaviour only in cases of some famous ambushes. Maybe very good skirmishers could do this regularly, but line infantry? I don't think so.
    And in my example I wrote about celtic shock/line infantry, not skirmishers. Are you saying the heavily armored Arkoi and Nedes Nesamoi carry javelins only to use them in the unlikely scenario they manage to find themselves looking at the back of their enemies? Not likely IMHO. Since I see plenty of light units (who can flank easily) having 12+ attack javelins, I don't understand why those of many shock troops (who cannot flank as effectively) have only 7 to 9 attack, it should be the opposite IMHO. Isn't the rule of thumb that light units carried many light javelins and heavy units fewer but heavier? About celtic units again, their weak javelins plus their weak charge (for the reasons I expressed above) make them very bad at shocking the enemy line actually, which doesn't seem right to me. Am I missing something?

  8. #368
    Roma_Victrix's Avatar Gatorade, is it in you?
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    12,905

    Default Re: Rad compares units - a thread for balancing.

    This thread bills itself as a "thread for balancing", but is it really that balanced? I mean, really, though? If it was, you'd see a lot more of the balancing being done by Rad, who is suspiciously absent of late and is supposedly the one here comparing units and balancing them on a balancing bar (after a balanced breakfast). Come on, Rad, quit lying to us and/or letting us down with your false claims, your false gods, and your false balancing act.

    With that being said, I just want to chime in by saying I think the units in the game are very deliberately balanced, with strengths and weaknesses compared to other units that often necessitate having a mixed roster and army when marching into battle. For instance, some cavalry units have better charge bonuses, but others might have better melee attack or missile attack. Others will have higher defense, either through their larger, more effective shield, or body armor, or sheer defensive skills. And this game isn't so rock-paper-scissors about it either, considering how I've seen Hellenistic Kataphractoi run down and annihilate poorly armored spearmen on the open field of battle, but I literally just recently had two units of poorly equipped Uiennos Celtic levy spearmen (recruited by my Roman faction) take down Hellenistic Kataphractoi at an urban choke point and street battle during a defensive siege on the battle map.

    Now that's balance!

  9. #369
    Jurand of Cracow's Avatar History and gameplay!
    Artifex

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Cracovia
    Posts
    2,054

    Default Re: Rad compares units - a thread for balancing.

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    No, javelins don't have ap any more.
    May I ask what was the argument for such a modification?
    I think the abstraction of a battlefield we've got in the M2TW engine makes this attribute useful. I think there should be little difference in the lethality of a javelin hit if a soldier wears armour or not. For an arrow - yes, the armour should make a difference, but for a javelin - not really (at least in the M2TW mechanics).

    Quote Originally Posted by Aper View Post
    Since I see plenty of light units (who can flank easily) having 12+ attack javelins, I don't understand why those of many shock troops (who cannot flank as effectively) have only 7 to 9 attack, it should be the opposite IMHO. Isn't the rule of thumb that light units carried many light javelins and heavy units fewer but heavier? About celtic units again, their weak javelins plus their weak charge (for the reasons I expressed above) make them very bad at shocking the enemy line actually, which doesn't seem right to me. Am I missing something?
    Additional argument: the AI doesn't send his troops around the players' units backs, it attacks directly, or at the flanks (I've seen this behaviour only for cavalry). So this is actually the mechanics that player may abuse.

    Lipe Aper, I don't find the Celtic units, famous for ferocious charges, to be effective at the charge. One, the javelins make little damage, two, the charge lasts a few moments and there're few kills in this time. The morale effect doesn't seem to make any difference - enemy troops rout only after taking many casualties, not recent casualties (this dichotomy is nicely shown in the Attila/Thrones engine, I hope it exists also in the M2TW).
    Quote Originally Posted by hlidskjalf View Post
    With the awkward battle mechanics it's damn near impossible to execute a perfect melee charge at a specific time. Walking the troops information, having them charge perfectly without the fumbling.. but when it does work, with their high charge stats, you can route a steady marian heavy armor maniple. I've sort of revisioned the awkward battle mechanics as a reflection on how difficult troop management in reality must be. Getting some Gaesatoi to do a disciplined charge at the side of a unit of Principes? Might never work perfectly, but when it does, that side of the battlefield will almost surely roll up and then you can almost surely get yourself a victory. I have been there, though, trying to walk a troop of high-impact Kelts around a line of enemies and yelling in frustration when they just awkwardly stumble toward the enemies' flank.
    @hlidskjalt, I didn't actually get what you want to convey: that the charges don't matter? or shouldn't matter?
    Last edited by Jurand of Cracow; February 27, 2019 at 07:10 AM.

  10. #370

    Default Re: Rad compares units - a thread for balancing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jurand of Cracow View Post
    @hlidskjalt, I didn't actually get what you want to convey: that the charges don't matter? or shouldn't matter?
    I wanted to reply to him too, because as I understand it, he said that frontal charge may not be effective, but a flanking charge (from Gaesati nonetheless!) can be very powerful. Quintus made a similar argument about javelins, to whom in modern Rome people would answer: "E 'sti cazzi?", roughly meaning "that's obvious" . Anything and everything is effective coming from the flanks/rear, we shouldn't bring this argument when talking about balance, IMHO.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jurand of Cracow View Post
    Like Aper, I don't find the Celtic units, famous for ferocious charges, to be effective at the charge. One, the javelins make little damage, two, the charge lasts a few moments and there're few kills in this time.
    Maybe the power_charge attibute can help, I thought it had effect only on cavalry but I saw the team gave it to a few infantry unit as well. I doubt it will make much difference though, because the real problem IMO is the low hit rate, which you cannot raise without ruining the overall balance. This is why I hope YourMadDoc will update his Alternative Battles mod, he achieved a remarkable battle balance despite raising hit rates a lot.
    Last edited by Aper; February 27, 2019 at 07:50 AM. Reason: added second quote

  11. #371

    Default Re: Rad compares units - a thread for balancing.

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    There's your problem, the shield values mean javelins are much more effective from behind, than frontally. Get them behind the fighting line, throw volley, then charge.
    It works but it's gamey.
    The situation you describe happen in ambush not in a pitched battle.
    You cannot expect skirmishers (=young boys and poor lads pressed into war) to perform commando-like manoeuvers.

    The current stat system has serious problems that should be adressed

  12. #372

    Default Re: Rad compares units - a thread for balancing.

    Well personally I wouldn't say serious problems, battles can be awesome and are better than in the vast majority of other M2TW based mods IMO. I'd say that some fne tuning is needed, but hey, everything is improvable. We are here to provide feedback not bashing, I hope that's clear to the team.

  13. #373

    Default Re: Rad compares units - a thread for balancing.

    Some of the numidian cavalrymen don't have a shield but have a value of 2 similar to the libyan cavalry, maurin cavalry and numidian nobles.

    Adding a shield to all the units would be a better solution me thinks

  14. #374

    Default Re: Rad compares units - a thread for balancing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Raiuga View Post
    Some of the numidian cavalrymen don't have a shield but have a value of 2 similar to the libyan cavalry, maurin cavalry and numidian nobles.

    Adding a shield to all the units would be a better solution me thinks
    Are you sure? It's been a while since I used that unit, but I remember that they all had shields... I think.
    I recommend a pugio rather than a spear, because in close quarters combat, a dagger will serve you better than a spear.

    Rad, 2016.

  15. #375

    Default Re: Rad compares units - a thread for balancing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rad View Post
    Are you sure? It's been a while since I used that unit, but I remember that they all had shields... I think.
    Sorry, I feel foolish. You are right, they all have shields.

    I usually play in medium graphics and in this settings some of the shields don't appear. I turned it to high and they were all there.

    Really sorry for the inconvenience I may have caused, gotta double check everything.

  16. #376

    Default Re: Rad compares units - a thread for balancing.

    No problem buddy
    This... and other threads were started because I have the habbit of checking everything five times
    I recommend a pugio rather than a spear, because in close quarters combat, a dagger will serve you better than a spear.

    Rad, 2016.

  17. #377

    Default Re: Rad compares units - a thread for balancing.

    The Libyian and Maurian Skirmishers have a really high melee atk (8 and 9 respectively) despite being skirmishers or in comparison to the other African units who are clearly lacking any dword units.

    This is in comparison to the Greek Euzonoi having a melee atk power of 3 (barely higher than the Toxotai and the Akonistai) despite clearly wielding swords, not knives or short swords.

  18. #378

    Default Re: Rad compares units - a thread for balancing.

    You got it wrong, mate. The Libyian and Maure skirmishers have swords, and them being skirmishers does not influence their attack power. The African units that don't have swords do not influence their attack power. Their skill and the type of sword they use are the factors.

    The Euzonoi have knives, not swords.
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    Daggers bruh, daggers.
    Last edited by Rad; March 11, 2019 at 04:23 PM.
    I recommend a pugio rather than a spear, because in close quarters combat, a dagger will serve you better than a spear.

    Rad, 2016.

  19. #379

    Default Re: Rad compares units - a thread for balancing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rad View Post
    You got it wrong, mate. The Libyian and Maure skirmishers have swords, and them being skirmishers does not influence their attack power. The African units that don't have swords do not influence their attack power. Their skill and the type of sword they use are the factors.

    The Euzonoi have knives, not swords.
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    Daggers bruh, daggers.
    Euzonoi are described at wielding a mix of daggers and swords though. I think they should indeed have a lower attack power, but 3 seems too extreme as they were better equipped than other psiloi in that regard even if still lightly. 5 would seem more reasonable given the description presented.

    We will either find a way, or make one.



  20. #380

    Default Re: Rad compares units - a thread for balancing.

    Still, they only have knives in the game. Until that changes, their attack power should be... knify.
    I recommend a pugio rather than a spear, because in close quarters combat, a dagger will serve you better than a spear.

    Rad, 2016.

Page 19 of 19 FirstFirst ... 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •