Page 9 of 12 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 LastLast
Results 161 to 180 of 227

Thread: Rad compares units - a thread for balancing.

  1. #161

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Hellenikon View Post
    I have noticed the new indohellenic cavalry has ap melee lances, is that intended? I thought all cavalry already lost their ap lances.

    The khuveshavagan (iranian kinsmen cavalry) has an armour value of 7, same as the hetairoi, yet they are more armoured (no exposed legs or arms). The bodyguard version of this unit has 8 armor rating.

    In addition the khuveshavagan are significantly slower than hetairoi, but their horses aren't really more armored (around equal), and the only difference with the riders themselves is they're wearing cheires and trousers. Are their horses supposed to be slower by design?

    Lastly, shouldn't the unit be named Huvaka? If i'm not mistaken, that's how the late achaemenid kinsmen were called, while the name khuveshavagan comes from the parthians.
    AP lances was an oversight, all the rest are gone.

    They can get a 1-point increase, but no more than that. On speed 0.903 compared to 0.957 isn't significantly slower.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rad View Post
    New one - Belgae swordsmen.

    Their armor rating is too high.
    With only one helmet and no body armor, an armor rating of 3 is too much.
    Reduced to 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sar1n View Post
    I know they've been talked about already, but I really feel that most used Thracian units are undervalued.

    Look at Raskumezenai. Compared to Lonchophoroi Hippeis, they're slightly superior...better ranged weapon (16 with 3 ammo vs. 12 with 2 ammo), better climate and ground bonuses. Only thing Lonchophoroi Hippeis have is one point in armour instead of defense skill. Cost...1750 vs. 1938. Raskumezenai in fact cost only little more than similar style, but significantly inferior, Sabellian Cavalry.

    While I can't really find proper close comparison unit for Katoikoi Thrakes and Peltenai, as their AP swords are rather rare feature in their supposed role, but...Katoikoi can easily chop through Polybian Principes, who fulfill virtually identical role and would be expected to face each other, while being 300 mnai cheaper. That's just one example.

    From experience, the Thracian units are extremely effective for their cost. Since 2.2, they've been most effective troops in my hellenistic campaigns.
    Climate/ground bonuses aren't part of the formula, and would be difficult to meaningfully include.

    Quote Originally Posted by Raiuga View Post
    Hi,

    Parashim Afriqim has a armor value of 4, same has Eqvites Romani (camillan) and Hippeis.

    Parashim Afriqim:
    - All helmets;
    - Mostly linothorax, some Breastplates;
    - Both legs with greaves.

    Eqvites Romani:
    - All Helmets;
    - Mixture of "no armor", Linothorax, breastplate, Italian breastplate;
    - No greaves.

    Hippeis:
    - All Helmets;
    - Mixture of "no armor", Linothorax, breastplate, Italian breastplate;
    - Mixture of no greaves, one greave and two leg greaves.

    Even if the last two unit have more breastplates, the Hippeis and Parashim should have an advantage over the Eqvites Romani, For example the equites sabelli has a similar type of armor to the Eqvites Romani (no linothorax but some leg greaves) and has an armor rating of 3.
    Reduced the Romans to 3.
    It began on seven hills - a historical house-ruled Romani AAR
    Heirs to Lysimachos - a semi-historical Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR
    Philetairos' Gift - a second attempt at an Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR


  2. #162

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

    Agema phalangitai have a shield value of 5

    Phalangitai have a shield value of 4, but the shield they use is the same as the agema in size.

    Mistophoroi phalangitai have a shield value of 4, but the shield they carry is smaller, like the one the deuteroi phalanx uses (3).

    The illyrian phalanx, due to their short spears, is quite possibly the worst phalanx of them all, performing in my tests worse than pantodapoi.

    I also find a bit odd how the progression in attack works for phalanxes, currently it looks like this:
    pantodapoi 2
    machimoi/illyrian/deuteroi/mistophoroi/phalangitai 3
    agema 6

    I don't think it makes sense that machimoi/deuteroi are at the same level that mistophoroi/phalangitai, i suggest increasing the later attack to 4 so the progression in quality is not only defensive but also noticeable on the offense. Therefore it would look like this:
    pantodapoi 2
    machimoi/illyrian/deuteroi 3
    mistophoroi/phalangitai 4
    agema 6

    Finally , i think these changes are warranted because the increase in price between the deuteroi phalanx (1200) to the phalangitai (2100) is quite significant, yet their performance currently is quite similar, so that most players in fact prefer deuteroi due to them being more cost-effective.
    Last edited by Hellenikon; October 31, 2017 at 06:59 AM.

  3. #163

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Hellenikon View Post
    Agema phalangitai have a shield value of 5

    Phalangitai have a shield value of 4, but the shield they use is the same as the agema in size.

    Mistophoroi phalangitai have a shield value of 4, but the shield they carry is smaller, like the one the deuteroi phalanx uses (3).

    The illyrian phalanx, due to their short spears, is quite possibly the worst phalanx of them all, performing in my tests worse than pantodapoi.

    I also find a bit odd how the progression in attack works for phalanxes, currently it looks like this:
    pantodapoi 2
    machimoi/illyrian/deuteroi/mistophoroi/phalangitai 3
    agema 6

    I don't think it makes sense that machimoi/deuteroi are at the same level that mistophoroi/phalangitai, i suggest increasing the later attack to 4 so the progression in quality is not only defensive but also noticeable on the offense. Therefore it would look like this:
    pantodapoi 2
    machimoi/illyrian/deuteroi 3
    mistophoroi/phalangitai 4
    agema 6

    Finally , i think these changes are warranted because the increase in price between the deuteroi phalanx (1200) to the phalangitai (2100) is quite significant, yet their performance currently is quite similar, so that most players in fact prefer deuteroi due to them being more cost-effective.
    Given the cost and rarity of the Phalangitai, I can accept those. Though the Agema have too high a shield value, they're not carrying thureoi, which is equivalent to a value of 5.

    Deuteroi and mercs has smaller shields, everyone else's shield is the same size.
    Last edited by QuintusSertorius; October 31, 2017 at 07:18 AM.
    It began on seven hills - a historical house-ruled Romani AAR
    Heirs to Lysimachos - a semi-historical Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR
    Philetairos' Gift - a second attempt at an Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR


  4. #164

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

    @Quintus
    Related to the Belgae swordsmen - I think that an armor rating of 2 is still undeserved.
    The generic Celtic spearmen have an armor rating of 1, and they actually have more armor - 2 types of helmets instead of 1.

  5. #165

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

    One question: We have now Saka cataphracts as a unit and will probably have Sarma cata as well in the future. My question is who were those cata guys in social order in their societies? Because we know that nobles were the richest guys in the steppe, so normally, they would have the best armaments for their disposal. But in EB2 we have a heavy distinction in armour values between nobles and cataphracht guys. In short : why nobles have double less armour then cata's ? Were cata"s "smarter" to buy better equipment ? Were they nobles in their social groups or mercenaries? Even of you are a horse archer more than melee guy, why would they burden themselves with less if they were very greedy and could get better protection?

  6. #166
    Cohors_Evocata's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    On the crossroads
    Posts
    723

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

    Quote Originally Posted by bordinis View Post
    One question: We have now Saka cataphracts as a unit and will probably have Sarma cata as well in the future. My question is who were those cata guys in social order in their societies? Because we know that nobles were the richest guys in the steppe, so normally, they would have the best armaments for their disposal. But in EB2 we have a heavy distinction in armour values between nobles and cataphracht guys. In short : why nobles have double less armour then cata's ? Were cata"s "smarter" to buy better equipment ? Were they nobles in their social groups or mercenaries? Even of you are a horse archer more than melee guy, why would they burden themselves with less if they were very greedy and could get better protection?
    Answer from one of our historians:

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    Quote Originally Posted by Arjos
    There existed several tactical approaches to warfare in the steppe and in fact better armies had many contingents, covering as many roles as possible...

    The idea that the most armoured equals are the best/smarter is incorrect, imagine an army of just heavily armoured riders, being very slow and growing tired chasing enemies. They'd be dead in no time, very much like a single Spartan unit getting wiped out by Peltastai during the Peloponnesian War...

    Armoured riders couldn't exist or operate without the concerted effort of missile support and allied infantry or medium cavalry pinning down the enemies...

    At most it could be said that the nobles, wearing less armour are the attempt to be as versatile as possible a single unit could be. Meaning that they could feign retreats, skirmish, melee and even charge. However their presence alone would mean that their numbers would be too small and casualties too costly...

    Paradoxically heavily armoured men were some of the most fragile ones, in case of a defeat or retreat, because they were too easy to catch and couldn't outmaneuver anyone. Only the prospect of lucrative ransoms kept them alive in such cases, while lighter warriors could safely run away and regroup...

    Socially, armoured riders were wealthy warriors, not necessarily noble by birth, and could also have had a past as mercenaries...
    Last edited by Cohors_Evocata; November 01, 2017 at 06:26 PM.
    I tend to edit my posts once or several times after writing and uploading them. Please keep this in mind when reading a recent post of mine. Also, should someone, for some unimaginable reason, wish to rep me, please add your username in the process, so I can at least know whom to be grateful towards.

    My thanks in advance.

  7. #167

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

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    Given the cost and rarity of the Phalangitai, I can accept those. Though the Agema have too high a shield value, they're not carrying thureoi, which is equivalent to a value of 5.
    I thought the high shield value was indicative of the quality of their shields? Anyway, I'm just happy that the lower tier phalanxes aren't as utterly impervious to missiles from the front as they were in EBI.

  8. #168

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

    Thank you for the answer! that makes sense.

  9. #169

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

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    AP lances was an oversight, all the rest are gone.
    Armenian bodyguards still have AP lances. Is that intentional?

    Also, I was wondering about the discrepancies in charge bonus between Eranag Aswar (11), Aswar i Kapodakiya (11) and Aswar i Mad (21). They look kind of similar to me in terms of stats and class (and cost), also all of them use overhand spears (IIRC. Have hardly used the Medians so far), yet the latter have almost twice the charge bonus of the former. BTW, Iranian Mounted Skirmishers have a very low charge bonus (3) despite carrying spears.

    And then, Hyrcanian Hillmen carry axes, according to the EDU. But I'm pretty sure they used overhand spears when I last threw them into battle. That was after their javelins were depleted, too. Am I going crazy?

  10. #170

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

    AP lances are an oversight.

    Medians use two-handed lances, the other two one-handed overhand spears. Iranian skirmishers have a retained javelin, not even a spear.

    I'm sure the Hyrkanians have axes.
    It began on seven hills - a historical house-ruled Romani AAR
    Heirs to Lysimachos - a semi-historical Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR
    Philetairos' Gift - a second attempt at an Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR


  11. #171

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

    Illyrian cavalry have too low armor.
    Comparisson: Illyrians vs Iranian medium cavalry.
    Illyrians - fully helmeted, disc breastplates, 1-2 linothorax, muscled cuirass, greaves - armor rating of 3, I believe
    Iranians - few, if not one, helmet, 2 linothorax like items, rest is clothing - armor rating of 4

    In general, cavalry needs an armor revamp. Something fuzzy is happening there.

  12. #172

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

    No, cavalry has already had an armour value revamp to account for the horse as well as man. The upshot is that armour values are lower than they were, with the intended consequence that they're more vulnerable in melee.
    It began on seven hills - a historical house-ruled Romani AAR
    Heirs to Lysimachos - a semi-historical Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR
    Philetairos' Gift - a second attempt at an Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR


  13. #173

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

    Yeah, I understood that one earlier. I was referring to the issue of how some lightly armored units have a higher armor rating than some significantly more armored units, like in the example above.

  14. #174

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Rad View Post
    Yeah, I understood that one earlier. I was referring to the issue of how some lightly armored units have a higher armor rating than some significantly more armored units, like in the example above.
    If you have other examples, highlight them. Make sure you observe more than one spawn of the unit, some of those with many variations can give the appearance of very different levels of overall armour.

    I've updated the Illyrians with a higher armour value and higher cost.
    Last edited by QuintusSertorius; November 04, 2017 at 10:56 AM.
    It began on seven hills - a historical house-ruled Romani AAR
    Heirs to Lysimachos - a semi-historical Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR
    Philetairos' Gift - a second attempt at an Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR


  15. #175

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

    Both the Daha cavalry have an armor rating of 3, but no armor to speak of. The Illyrinas have... had an armor rating of 3, but were quite heavily armored in comparison.

    I'll find more examples. It usually has to do something with eastern cavalry being visually lighter, but having a higher armor rating than western cavalry.

  16. #176

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

    Speaking of the illyrians,

    Hellenikon rightly pointed out that the illyrian light phalanx is in dire need of love. The issues with pike phalanx in this engine are even more exacerbated by them having short pikes, and they suffer being as immobile as even the hellenic native phalanx, but less effective in nearly all respects.

    A discrepancy I've noticed: their description says:

    "...the Illyrians developed a light phalanx, whose soldiers used the pelta and 4 meter-long sarissas (much shorter than the macedonian type) and had a little bit more mobility in the battlefield."

    And yet the peltophoroi are as slow as the low-tier phalangites (0.65), and slower than professional phalangites (0.7).

    Can we bump their unit speed to match the description, and the fact that they use shorter pikes? That might give the Illyrians an actual mechanical niche on the video-game battlefield: a more mobile pike unit that sacrifices reach (and therefore overall effectiveness from the front) for the ability to scoot into position.

  17. #177

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Krampus View Post
    Speaking of the illyrians,

    Hellenikon rightly pointed out that the illyrian light phalanx is in dire need of love. The issues with pike phalanx in this engine are even more exacerbated by them having short pikes, and they suffer being as immobile as even the hellenic native phalanx, but less effective in nearly all respects.

    A discrepancy I've noticed: their description says:

    "...the Illyrians developed a light phalanx, whose soldiers used the pelta and 4 meter-long sarissas (much shorter than the macedonian type) and had a little bit more mobility in the battlefield."

    And yet the peltophoroi are as slow as the low-tier phalangites (0.65), and slower than professional phalangites (0.7).

    Can we bump their unit speed to match the description, and the fact that they use shorter pikes? That might give the Illyrians an actual mechanical niche on the video-game battlefield: a more mobile pike unit that sacrifices reach (and therefore overall effectiveness from the front) for the ability to scoot into position.
    Hmmm; yes, I'll bump their speed up to 0.75.
    It began on seven hills - a historical house-ruled Romani AAR
    Heirs to Lysimachos - a semi-historical Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR
    Philetairos' Gift - a second attempt at an Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR


  18. #178

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

    Dacian skirmishers - armor rating of 3, no armor at all.

  19. #179

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

    Just want to say I love the robust discussion and attention to detail that most of us players wouldn't figure out on our own.

    One of the many reasons why this is the only Total War game for me.

  20. #180

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

    That's what I started this thread - fine tuning.
    The Eb team has done its research and made a new unit. Let's say it's light infantry. It's our job to help make that unit behave like light infantry should (to the best of our inherently limited knowledge), in comparison to similar and different types of units, with all its strengths and weaknesses.

    @Quintus
    I play a custom game with several companies of the unit I mean to examine. I do visual check, noting all the equipment in that unit, then I compare the stats to a unit I consider standard/similar enough.
    Last edited by Rad; November 05, 2017 at 07:54 AM.

Page 9 of 12 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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